Latest
from Keith Mathison

The main body of Peter's second epistle begins with Peter's replies to several objections to his eschatological doctrine (1:16–21). The first objection apparently raised by the false teachers is that Peter's eschatological teaching concerning the coming of Christ and of judgment is merely a myth (vv. 16–18). Peter assures his readers that the apostles did not follow cleverly devised myths, but were eyewitnesses of Christ's majesty. At the Transfiguration of Jesus, they were even witnesses to a foretaste of the glory to be revealed at the Second Advent (vv. 17–18). Peter also argues that the eschatological doctrine of the apostles is based on the writings of the Old Testament prophets (v. 19), men who spoke the very word of God (vv. 20–21).
Keep Reading

In this series, we have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In our last post, we looked at Calvin's distinction between knowledge of earthly things and heavenly things in order to understand why Dr. Sproul and other Reformed theologians say that the church can learn from unbelieving scientists . In this post, we need to look at what Christians should do when science and Scripture seem to conflict.
Keep Reading

Eschatology moves to the foreground in 1 Corinthians 15. Here Paul turns his full attention to the doctrine of the resurrection. The question to which Paul is responding is not stated explicitly until verse 12. Paul informs us there that some of the Corinthians were saying that "there is no resurrection of the dead." As we examine the text it will become clear that what they were denying was the future bodily resurrection of believers. Paul makes very clear in this chapter how central the doctrine of the resurrection is to the Christian faith. His argument proceeds in two stages. In verses 1–34, he demonstrates the reality of the resurrection of the dead. In verses 35–58, he explains how it is that the bodily resurrection of believers is possible.
Keep Reading

In this series, we have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In our last post, we looked at the geocentricity of Martin Luther and John Calvin in order to expand on Dr. Sproul's point regarding past mistakes Christians have made in their understanding of God's creation. Dr. Sproul argued that the church was able to learn from nonbelieving scientists who studied God's created works. For Reformed Christians, this raises several questions related to the Fall and its impact on human reasoning.
Keep Reading

In 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18, Paul turns to a specifically eschatological question regarding believers who have died. He writes, "But we do not want you to be uninformed brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope" (v. 13). A question has arisen among the Thessalonians because one or more of their fellow believers has died since Paul left.i Based on what Paul says in this and the following verses, it appears that the Thessalonians were concerned about the position of deceased believers at the Lord's Second Coming.ii Their question indicates that this was one topic that they did not understand fully. Apparently, Paul had taught them something about the resurrection of the dead but was forced to leave the city before teaching them as much as they needed to know.iii Paul's basic response to their concern is to tell them that they have no reason to worry.
Keep Reading

In this series, we have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In our last post, we looked at the distinction between God's infallible revelation and our fallible interpretation of that revelation. In this post, we will look at the thoughts of Martin Luther and John Calvin concerning certain astronomical ideas that were being introduced during their lifetimes.
Keep Reading

We have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In our last post, we looked at the Reformed distinction between general and special revelation. In this post, we begin looking at another crucial distinction that is regularly overlooked, namely the distinction between God's infallible revelation and our fallible interpretation of that revelation.
Keep Reading

One of John's few explicitly eschatological passages is found in chapter 5. The occasion is the healing of a lame man at the pool of Bethesda on a Sabbath. Because Jesus heals the man on a Sabbath, the Jews persecute him (5:16). Jesus then says to them, "My Father is working until now, and I am working" (v. 17). The response infuriates the Jewish leaders even more because "not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God" (v. 18). Jesus then says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel" (vv. 19–20). As Barrett explains, Jesus' point here is that he is what he is "only in humble obedience to and complete dependence upon the Father."
Keep Reading

In this series of blog posts, we have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In the previous post, we stopped in the middle of his answer to discuss his assertion: All Truth is God's Truth. Following this statement, Dr. Sproul continued by making a very important point about general and special revelation.
Keep Reading